Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality - Improve Your World
Get involved in YOUR city and locality 
Improve Your World Home | About Us | Sitemap | Search | Contact Us 

Home >> NPOs >> Nilam Patel Bahushrut Foundation >> Nilam Patel's Thesis


Many studies have in the past have indicated the benefits of inclusive education for disabled children. This particular study also reflects a positive sentiment of parents of hearing impaired children. They all responded positively to the idea of inclusion. This is evident form the fact that their children are studying in regular schools. This sentiment was backed by special educators and speech therapists. Both sets of population sought more co-operation and sensitivity form heads and teachers of regular schools.  

In contrast the regular school teachers appeared to have very little or no knowledge of the disability, namely hearing handicap or the advantages of inclusive educational set up. Some were opposed to the idea of inclusion and some were totally ignorant of the problems faced by such children in regular schools. Most teachers in regular school with an exception of a few appeared to be indifferent toward inclusive education in general and disable children in particular.  

The expectations of regular teachers as well as special educators from parents of hearing impaired children were very similar. They included regular visits to schools, consistency in supporting the child with day to day work, explaining difficult concepts, and providing positive reinforcement to build confidence in the child. In most cases these expectations were matched by the parental efforts. In addition some parents also helped the child by providing opportunities for social interaction with the class mates as well as other friends to enhance language and speech skills.  

In response to the question, ‘What would you like to change about the school in inclusive educational set up?’ Some regular teachers were of the opinion that there should be less noise in the class room. Similar need was expressed by 50% of hearing impaired children. Both the regular teachers and the hearing impaired children shared the view that there should be less number of children in the class. To combat the problem of noise, some parents had suggested the provision of FM system in regular schools. Though FM system has its advantages in noise reduction, considering the price factor, how practical would it be?  

According to both the regular teachers as well as parents, hearing impaired children had difficulty in learning 2nd and 3rd languages, Social Studies and oral work like recitation and dictation. SSC board has given exemption from learning 2nd and 3rd languages at primary as well as secondary level to such children studying in regular schools. This provision also extends to junior level college education. Is similar exemption given by ICSC or CBC boards? In spite of this provision the school authorities insist on their learning 2nd and 3rd languages.  

Many special educators and regular teachers feel that there should be a resource teacher in the regular school itself to help the hearing impaired child to cope with the difficulties faced by him on a day to day basis. Govt. has made a provision for one special teacher per every eight hearing impaired children in a regular school. Many regular school authorities are not aware of this provision and those who are aware, do not avail this facility due to red tapism in fund allocation.  

All the parents, special educators as well as regular teachers acknowledged and recommended the need for such a child to sit in a front row. This would decrease the distance between the teacher and the child to facilitate better listening and lip reading of what was being said by the teacher.

Fig 11

There was disparity in responses of regular teachers and those of special educators to a question regarding mode of communication used by the child. According to normal teachers only 53% of children communicated ‘only verbally’ and rest of 47% of children used gestures as well. In contrast according to special educators 87% of children communicated ‘only verbally’ and only 13% of children used gestures as well. (Refer to Fig 11) The reason for this disparity may be due to special educator’s familiarity with the child’s speech which is easily understood by her where as regular teacher may face difficulty in understanding somewhat unintelligible speech and the child may resort to use of gestures to make him self understood. None of the children used signs.  


Previous | Next